Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
1,217
edits
Electrolysis/Release Criteria/Jank: Difference between revisions
Electrolysis/Release Criteria/Jank (view source)
Revision as of 23:35, 19 February 2016
, 19 February 2016more details
(+GC) |
(more details) |
||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
INPUT_EVENT_RESPONSE_MS is the better measure for e10s/nonE10s comparisons, as it is valid across more than one OS and more than one process (EVENTLOOP_UI_ACTIVITY_EXP_MS is valid on Windows only and in the chrome process only). I was using the analysis of that measure as the primary reason for closing bug 1223780 ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1223780 ) using analyses on beta45ex1 (prelim analysis was done here: https://gist.github.com/chutten/9b9e29df10e0f7306f99 analysis on the later data was performed, but not published, as it was largely identical) and prelim data from beta45ex2 ( https://gist.github.com/chutten/3129baf8d5e0f10ef54a ) | INPUT_EVENT_RESPONSE_MS is the better measure for e10s/nonE10s comparisons, as it is valid across more than one OS and more than one process (EVENTLOOP_UI_ACTIVITY_EXP_MS is valid on Windows only and in the chrome process only). I was using the analysis of that measure as the primary reason for closing bug 1223780 ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1223780 ) using analyses on beta45ex1 (prelim analysis was done here: https://gist.github.com/chutten/9b9e29df10e0f7306f99 analysis on the later data was performed, but not published, as it was largely identical) and prelim data from beta45ex2 ( https://gist.github.com/chutten/3129baf8d5e0f10ef54a ) | ||
Open questions: | |||
* has the new metric recieved appropriate testing? (automated or manual) | |||
* Do we need to follow up and do camera-based analysis to measure latency from keypress to actual visual on-screen? | |||
* are there any concerns? Can we call this a PASS? | |||
=== jank per minute of active usage === | === jank per minute of active usage === | ||